This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Grayson Sends Letter Demanding Halt Of Illegal Foreclosures, Calls Out "Largest Seizure Of Private Property Ever Attempted By Banks And Government"

Tyler Durden's picture




 

The key story from this morning was the Bloomberg report that GMAC Bank had halted foreclosures in 23 states, following disturbing news from last week that rekindled the latent debate over whether servicer banks do in fact own deeds to mortgages on which they foreclose on, and whether the entire foreclosure process is in fact fraudulent (one judge found it to be so, creating a massive headache precedent for the banker community). Yet the company which initially agreed with Bloomberg's version of events, is now retracing and claiming that foreclosures are in fact continuing... with a footnote. Reuters reports: "GMAC Mortgage, a unit of Ally
Financial Inc, is continuing with all new residential
foreclosures despite a report it had stopped them, a
spokeswoman said on Monday. But some evictions have been suspended while the company
reviews its internal procedures, the company said.
" Maybe the company can clarify just what event catalyzed the decision to suspend evictions, and specifically which "internal procedures" are being reviewed. Also, it is about time for the ABA to step in and share some insight on a topic that has millions of Americans suddenly in arms. And since that won't happen, it is up to the one or two politicians who are not in the bankers' (and the Fed's) pockets to raise some noise. Enter Alan Grayson who in a letter just released to a Florida Supreme Court Justice says:"If the reports I am hearing are true, the illegal foreclosures taking
place represent the largest seizure of private property ever attempted
by banks and government entities.
"

Grayson, best known for his endless skewering of Ben Bernanke and his henchmen during congressional hearings, has just sent a letter to Justice Canady of the Florida Supreme Court, demanding a halt to all illegal foreclosure activity. GMAC may have dodged the bullet, but the stink that Grayson is about to dig up may end up killing a massive, and illegal, funding loophole for the entire banking industry.

Full letter below:

September 20, 2010

Chief Justice Charles T. Canady
Florida Supreme Court
500 South Duval Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1900
 
Dear Chief Justice Canady,

I am disturbed by the increasing reports of predatory ‘foreclosure mills’ in Florida.  The New York Times and Mother Jones have both recently reported on the rampant and widespread practices of document fraud and forgery involved in mortgage assignments.  My staff has spoken with multiple foreclosure specialists and attorneys in Florida who confirm these reports.

Three foreclosure mills - the Law Offices of Marshall C. Watson, Shapiro & Fishman, and the Law Offices of David J. Stern - constitute roughly 80% of all foreclosure proceedings in the state of Florida.  All are under investigation by Attorney General Bill McCollum.  If the reports I am hearing are true, the illegal foreclosures taking place represent the largest seizure of private property ever attempted by banks and government entities.  This is lawlessness.

I respectfully request that you abate all foreclosures involving these firms until the Attorney General of the state of Florida has finished his investigations of those firms for document fraud.

I have included a court order, in which Chase, WAMU, and Shapiro and Fishman are excoriated by a judge for document fraud on the court.  In this case, Chase attempted to foreclose on a home, when the mortgage note was actually owned by Fannie Mae.

Taking someone's home should not be done lightly.  And it should certainly be done in accordance with the law.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.
 

Sincerely,

Alan Grayson
Member of Congress

 

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:30 | 593822 ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture

To sum it up, I don't hate the dude, in fact I have more respect for him than some politicians.  I will say that I think most liberals are more intellectually honest than conservatives. (using the terms loosely.  "liberals" tend to be liberal.  "Conservatives" tend to be RINOs).   He fits that bill.  And he is actually right on some things, I just don't see him as the hero that some here seem to. 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 02:52 | 594179 Handle with care
Handle with care's picture

I'm starting to sound like a Grayson cheerleader in this thread but he's also VERY VERY right on the matter of campaign finance and the insanity of the SCOTUS ruling that corporations have greater rights than citizens to finance politics.

From his website:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-to-4 decision in Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission is the worst Supreme Court ruling in more than a century. It opened the door to political bribery and corruption on the largest scale imaginable. Corporations, foreign-owned businesses and foreign governments will be allowed to spend unlimited amounts of cash on propaganda to dictate the outcomes of our elections. We cannot put the law up for sale, and award government to the highest bidder.
That’s why I introduced legislation to prevent a corporate takeover of government in America. My “Save Our Democracy” Platform aims to stave off the threat of "corpocracy.” Each of the bills is clear and concise; none is longer than four pages.
Here are the eight bills I introduced, and what they aim to accomplish:
1) The Business Should Mind Its Own Business Act (H.R. 4431): Implements a 500% excise tax on corporate contributions to political committees, and on corporate expenditures on political advocacy campaigns.
2) The Public Company Responsibility Act (H.R. 4435): Prevents companies making political contributions and expenditures from trading their stock on national exchanges.
3) The End Political Kickbacks Act (H.R. 4434): Prevents for-profit corporations that receive money from the government from making political contributions, and limits the amount that employees of those companies can contribute.
4) The Corporate Propaganda Sunshine Act (H.R. 4432): Requires publicly-traded companies to disclose in SEC filings money used for the purpose of influencing public opinion, rather than promoting their products and services.
5) The Ending Corporate Collusion Act (H.R. 4433): Applies antitrust law to industry political action committees.
6) The End the Hijacking of Shareholder Funds Act (H.R. 4487): This bill requires the approval of a majority of a public company’s shareholders for any expenditure by that company to influence public opinion on matters not related to the company’s products or services.
7) The America is for Americans Act (H.R. 4510): Bans all political contributions from foreign companies, or domestic companies with any foreign owners.
8) The Pick Your Poison Act (H.R. 4511): Requires corporations to choose between using lobbyists to influence the political process, or spending money on campaign propaganda.
You can count on me to fight the special interests. I don’t owe anything to anyone but you.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:49 | 593245 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

"He just happens to be right on the issue of the Fed."

Agree. I'll take victories where they count, fuck the rest.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:43 | 593363 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Very good!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:19 | 593148 billwilson
billwilson's picture

Huh?

Grayson makes sense. He doesn't take shit form the GOP like most Dems. He actually fights back, and does so quite well. A few more Graysons and the Dems would actually hold the house.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:51 | 593249 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

bill-

"A few more Graysons..."

bring it on!

- Ned

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:28 | 593175 Eureka Springs
Eureka Springs's picture

And what part of the GOP plan wasn't - die quickly, aside from the part that wanted to bleed all your cash and holdings before you do die?

 

Grayson lost me (an early and ardent supporter) completely when he voted for the Obama plan... but that doesn't mean his description of the GOP wasn't spot on.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:23 | 593321 ColonelCooper
ColonelCooper's picture

It's Holdgren, Sunstein and Emmanuel's brother that publish books about dying early. 

The GOP just wants you to die if you're poor.

/sarcasm

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 16:57 | 593035 pamriallc
pamriallc's picture

this is precisely why democrats are going to lose this fall.

another pathetic attempt to "save the little guy" when in fact he's now working off of a "technicality" --- what grayson is debating here is that the mortgage "servicing agent" (the bank) is foreclosing on the mortgage-holder and not the "direct" owner of the debt--- he's saying that the FNM/FRE guys should be directly forclosing.   remember FNM or FRE--- who bought these mortgages from the banks to save the same US Citizens that ALAN is now trying to bail out byu saying the debt isn't technically collectable..

so you guessed right.... these banks are (alreadty) giving away 4% 30 year money and when someone can't pay, the "alan grayson technicality" kicks in and the subsidized rates arent enough.... he's (now) making the argument that the debt is "uncollectable anyway" since the banks don't own the mortgages anymore---- so why not just live for free?

a weak attempt at being a "hero for those who won't pay their bills" which costs the system untold billions of dollars.  truly unique scenario, and one which shouldn't be tolerates.  for my money, I'd rather see an honest system than one that relies on alan grayson for technicalities which avoid the main probloem in this system which is simple--- people got overextended, the faster that people let the assets go and rebuild again, the faster we get to a real recoverty.

grayson must go.

shawn a. mesaros  pamria llc

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:04 | 593083 Burnbright
Burnbright's picture

So we should just let banks get away with selling property they don't own? Get real.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 16:52 | 593043 pizzgums
pizzgums's picture

mmmmm, not exactly...

 

now this is out :

 

GMAC denies reports of foreclosure moratorium

By Wallace Witkowski SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- GMAC Mortgage on Monday denied reports that it was instituting a mortgage foreclosure moratorium in 23 states. "The speculation likely emanates from a direction previously given by GMAC Mortgage to certain of its outsource vendors to allow time to address a potential issue that was raised in a number of existing foreclosures challenging the internal procedure we used for executing one or more judicially required forms," GMAC said in a statement. GMAC said that "all new residential foreclosures are continuing in the ordinary course of business with no interruption in our usual practice."

 

screw'em all, kick'em out. gummint mandated loans to people who didn't have credit to qualify promoted and sold by predatory lendors. and this was expected to end well ?

 

riiiight....

 

"this is -not- your beautiful house, we may not know exactly whose house it is but it sure as sh!t isn't yours."

(and if you know where to look, my name is in the credit rolls of the movie and the album.)

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:10 | 593298 Thunder Dome
Thunder Dome's picture

HIT THE ROAD, SLAVE!!!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 16:54 | 593045 EventHorizon
EventHorizon's picture

Perhaps a change in tact is warranted. If the bank is government owned (TARP bank) isn't it a federal actor? If it's a federal actor and it's taking private land (homes) it is subject to the fifth amendment "takings clause". At a minimum this requires following federal guidelines for the taking of private land for public purpose and the payment of just compensation. None of which has of course occurred, since the banks are just foreclosing under state law. But the federal government is held to a different standard than state law and the federal government can't use otherwise private actors to circumvent the Constitution, as has been established in precedent countless times....

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:02 | 593073 Burnbright
Burnbright's picture

Some of you posting on here are beyond stupid. First of banks credit you money, they don't loan out actual deposits. If their is no consideration, i.e. no loss is suffered, then you don't owe shit.

But more to the point if a bank can't produce the original contract (the title) by law they can't make a valid claim of debt. What the banks are doing is unlawful and so are many of the judges deciding on bankruptcies. My father has first hand experience with court corruption in Sonoma county of California.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:33 | 593198 Hang The Fed
Hang The Fed's picture

Once again, it's been baldly demonstrated that it doesn't take much effort to get people to resort to fighting with each other when it should be realized that the government/banking industry hybrid is the real enemy, and always was.  If we really and truly held to our founding principles, there wouldn't be tent cities sprouting up around ghost towns, but I suspect that that will be one of the first things to spark an insurrection against this puppet show, preferably sooner rather than later.

Jesus fucking christ...even if you're fiscally responsible, the banks are looking to fuck you out of ANY amount of money that they can, be it in cents or hundreds or thousands of dollars, via legitimate, illegitimate, or just plain "WTF?" methods.  Rome is burning again...all that's missing is a fat, inbred lunatic wailing away on a fiddle.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:46 | 593375 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Does Barney play the fiddle?  Uh oh, here come the black helicopters, gotta go!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:12 | 593422 PhattyBuoy
PhattyBuoy's picture

Larry (jabba the hutt) ...

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:04 | 593081 ZackAttack
ZackAttack's picture

This is about MERS, I suspect.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:20 | 593140 Village Idiot
Village Idiot's picture

the HUBRIS of MERS.

 

"There is no safety in unlimited technological hubris" (McGeorge Bundy).

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:14 | 593126 Implicit simplicit
Implicit simplicit's picture

So, you think the banks should be able to take ownership of the house even if they don't hold the proper paperwork showing title.

Sounds like gangster bankster dictatorship.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:20 | 593131 neelyfallon
neelyfallon's picture

"Does not Dionysius seem to have made it sufficiently clear that there can be nothing happy for the person over whom some fear always looms?"

It is bad enough to be laid off twice in nine months, to land a part-time job, and with the constant threat of foreclosure to be foreclosed by someone abusing the law in most states: you gots to own the note to foreclose it.

Think I enjoy living under the Sword my fat, happy fuck face friend? Only MoFo banksters with lottery ticket subzero money to throw around at 22% interest on folks willing to buy strip mall imported Chinese shit can live under the Sword.

Think again my friend. This ain't no way to live and ain't no way to die. This is revolution. This is the end my friend.

 

 

 

 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:20 | 593151 Marc45
Marc45's picture

It almost sounds like Grayson is using a technicality to justify squatting.  While the note holder does have the right to foreclose, there can be others in the loop who have that right as well.  For instance, any leinholder can instigate foreclosure proceedings.  This might be a second mortgage, home equity loan, contractor lein, etc.  Not just the original first mortgage holder.  If there is a question of whether a foreclosure is actionable by a specific party, this can be dealt with in court(the proper place) not the court of public opinion.  Sometimes there are grey areas in the law.  What I don't get is that someone is not paying their bill and yet there is pressure to not evict them and blame the banks.  It doesn't matter how many other crooks are afoot, two wrongs don't make a right.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:50 | 593246 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Until we collectively face the music and attempt some semblance of objectivity regarding our excesses, we will NEVER recover from our addiction...  never get our politics straight...  never cure ourselves.  We have to dig down deep into the bowels of our souls and admit that we totally fucked up and we now have the resolve to institute viable and painful remedial measures.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:38 | 594040 UncleFester
UncleFester's picture

Not gonna happen at the voting booth.  We've got to go outside the system to accomplish this.  Congress is eyeing everything, and I mean "Everything" to keep lipstick on this pig.  Our 401Ks, Pensions, SSN retirement age, fudging the CPI, etc.  Everything is on the table.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:51 | 593250 Bob
Bob's picture

What's right in one situation is not necessarily right--or wrong--in another.  And vice versa.  Context matters.  Capital punishment for murderers is a fine example.

Sometimes that is what real Justice requires. 

Does it bother you that the parties claiming foreclosure rights have already robbed the nation and world blind . . . and plan to continue doing it--and will--unless they are stopped by force?   

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:15 | 593308 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

"a technicality"

You either have title, or you do not. Right now foreclosing banks don't have title--for untold millions of homes. Capiche?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:24 | 593829 UninterestedObserver
UninterestedObserver's picture

WTF is wrong with you people? If you don't pay your mortgage the TITLE holder can initiate foreclosure proceedings - So if GMAC has your title can Wells Fargo foreclose on you? People need to wake the fuck up and see the same pattern emerging over and over again - the one where taxpayers get fucked and banks are the beneficiaries regardless of what laws/rights get trampled on.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:30 | 593177 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Excuse me, Mr. Grayson, but the occupants of those homes don't actually OWN them until they pay off their mortgages! Thus, foreclosure is NOT a private property seizure. It is a return of the property to the mortgage lender, who is the true owner until the mortgage is paid!

This sounds like another activist judge who has decided to throw out the rule of law and impose their own ideology, regardless of the catastrophic consequences. This is just another reason why we need to return to the Constitution, which includes the rule of law and respect for contracts. The servicing mortgage companies are authorized agents of Fannie/Freddie. This whole thing could quickly spiral out of control if mortgage cos. can't count on the courts to enforce their rights under the law!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:00 | 593270 Geoff-UK
Geoff-UK's picture

I believe you missed a critical component of the problem--the servicing banks are UNABLE TO IDENTIFY to the judge what entity actually owns the note at this moment in time.

It's like if a lawyer sued you for a debt, and the judge asked who the lawyer represented--and got a shoulder shrug in return.

 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:15 | 593550 Rainman
Rainman's picture

...besides, the debt has been cut up into little MBS slices more than an 8-ball of cheap street coke.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:18 | 593312 zaknick
zaknick's picture

bankster-lover

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:36 | 593353 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

"It is a return of the property to the mortgage lender, who is the true owner until the mortgage is paid!"

This is not true. You should read what you're responding to rather than serving up obedient deference to the banks in dutiful servitude to your masters, who, as it turns out, don't know how to dot I's or cross T's.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:47 | 594067 UncleFester
UncleFester's picture

I just had a fleeting thought...

What if: by spreading the risk to the public (MBS tranches, GSE's, tax-payer subsidized TARP, etc), could you prove in a court of law that everyone owns the TITLE and, therefore, no one but you owns the Title by 9/10 rule?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 21:44 | 593756 granolageek
granolageek's picture

The servicing banks could indeed foreclose as agents of fannie and freddie.

 

That is however, not what happened here. The servicing bank forged documents purporting to show that is was the actual lienholder, not the holder's agent. This would have allowed JPM to pocket fannie's money rather than forward it to fannie.

If the future bankruptcy trustee for fannie happened to catch this, it would have thrown the title to the property up in the air. It is 100% in the interest of the state of Florida and all its taxpayers to prevent this.

 

Oh yeah, while they were at it, JPM paid the recording fee on one fraudulent transaction rather than at least three real ones. Those recordings and appropriate fees have been required for centuries. This is not something you can blame on Obama, Clinton or even FDR. In what universe do you claim that a judge should allow a forged document to be accepted? In what universe do you expect even a Republican judge to accept a forged document that deprives the state of revenue?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:44 | 593232 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

But, who really owns the Debt?  The Banks or the Tranches of Mortgages in all of those CDO's?  What if there was Counterfiting of the Mortages.  Meaning that the Banks Sold more Mortgages that were actually originated?

If you have one Mortgage for $100,000. and $300,000. was put into all of those tranches you have Fraud.  Maybe that is why the Mortgage meltdown has caused so much distress.  It is like a triple downward cycle on an original $100,000.

Meaning that the market went down 3 times the original mortgage because it was counterfited in tranches by $300,000. instead of the original mortgage of $100,000.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:50 | 593243 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

Were the Bailouts to cover Counterfiting and FRAUD?  Is that why all of the bad loans were sold to FRE, FNM after the FED Nationalized them.  Was FRE, FNM to be the DUMPING ground for all of the Counterfited Mortgages?  Was it so the Taxpayers would have to eat all of the Counterfit Mortgages and not the Banks?  I think so.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:07 | 593293 Spalding_Smailes
Spalding_Smailes's picture

The typical mortgage bond was still structured in much the same way it had been when I worked at Salomon Brothers. The loans went into a trust that was designed to pay off its investors not all at once but according to their rankings. The investors in the top tranche, rated AAA, received the first payment from the trust and, because their investment was the least risky, received the lowest interest rate on their money. The investors who held the trusts’ BBB tranche got the last payments—and bore the brunt of the first defaults. Because they were taking the most risk, they received the highest return. Eisman wanted to bet that some subprime borrowers would default, causing the trust to suffer losses. The way to express this view was to short the BBB tranche. The trouble was that the BBB tranche was only a tiny slice of the deal.

But the scarcity of truly crappy subprime-mortgage bonds no longer mattered. The big Wall Street firms had just made it possible to short even the tiniest and most obscure subprime-mortgage-backed bond by creating, in effect, a market of side bets. Instead of shorting the actual BBB bond, you could now enter into an agreement for a credit-default swap with Deutsche Bank or Goldman Sachs. It cost money to make this side bet, but nothing like what it cost to short the stocks, and the upside was far greater.

The arrangement bore the same relation to actual finance as fantasy football bears to the N.F.L. Eisman was perplexed in particular about why Wall Street firms would be coming to him and asking him to sell short. “What Lippman did, to his credit, was he came around several times to me and said, ‘Short this market,’ ” Eisman says. “In my entire life, I never saw a sell-side guy come in and say, ‘Short my market.’”

“He’d call me and say, ‘Oh my God, this is a calamity here,’ ” recalls Eisman. All that was required for the BBB bonds to go to zero was for the default rate on the underlying loans to reach 14 percent. Eisman thought that, in certain sections of the country, it would go far, far higher.

The funny thing, looking back on it, is how long it took for even someone who predicted the disaster to grasp its root causes. They were learning about this on the fly, shorting the bonds and then trying to figure out what they had done. Eisman knew subprime lenders could be scumbags. What he underestimated was the total unabashed complicity of the upper class of American capitalism. For instance, he knew that the big Wall Street investment banks took huge piles of loans that in and of themselves might be rated BBB, threw them into a trust, carved the trust into tranches, and wound up with 60 percent of the new total being rated AAA.


As an investor, Eisman was allowed on the quarterly conference calls held by Moody’s but not allowed to ask questions. The people at Moody’s were polite about their brush-off, however. The C.E.O. even invited Eisman and his team to his office for a visit in June 2007. By then, Eisman was so certain that the world had been turned upside down that he just assumed this guy must know it too. “But we’re sitting there,” Daniel recalls, “and he says to us, like he actually means it, ‘I truly believe that our rating will prove accurate.’ And Steve shoots up in his chair and asks, ‘What did you just say?’ as if the guy had just uttered the most preposterous statement in the history of finance. He repeated it. And Eisman just laughed at him.”

“With all due respect, sir,” Daniel told the C.E.O. deferentially as they left the meeting, “you’re delusional.”

This wasn’t Fitch or even S&P. This was Moody’s, the aristocrats of the rating business, 20 percent owned by Warren Buffett. And the company’s C.E.O. was being told he was either a fool or a crook by one Vincent Daniel, from Queens.

Read more: http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/national-news/portfolio/2008/11/11/The-End-of-Wall-Streets-Boom/index3.html#ixzz107MEAbpK

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:54 | 593391 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Spalding, are you quoting Michael Lewis or are you Michael Lewis...this is right out of 'The Big Short' and you should give credit where it is due.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:01 | 593404 Spalding_Smailes
Spalding_Smailes's picture

Sorry for that, I thought most would follow link to original story... Next time I'll attach name with comment.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:49 | 594071 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

No worries...you post good shit!

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 01:16 | 594112 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

"The Big Short" should be required reading for anyone posting on Zero Hedge!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:21 | 593319 JR
JR's picture


I have to agree. The whole idea, I think, was a deliberate mortgage conspiracy set up by the Fed and investment bankers as a scam to defraud investors and the public. Now, while we struggle and fight over the entanglements, they’re basking on their Kono yachts and putting out press releases that we need to lower our "standard" of living. And no doubt planning another "bubble."

Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner, believed that  “the allegations of mortgage collateral fraud are true…that a significant number of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac mortgages that serve as collateral for U.S. mortgage-backed securities markets are not real. They do not exist…" That Chase as the lead HUD servicer and the other big banks implementing HUD fraud were using the same home to create ten or more mortgages that were placed into different pools.

Random incompetence is not the root cause of America’s suicidal course.  The nation’s first Secretary of Defense James Forrestal, assessing those responsible for a steady stream of foreign policy defeats, said:

Consistency has never been a mark of stupidity.  If they were merely stupid, they would make a mistake in our favor at least once in a while.

America is being hijacked under the threat of bankruptcy. 

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 11:00 | 594650 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

Also makes you wonder if the Companies that insured the Mortgages or CDO's like ABK, MBI, AIG have been paying 3 times or more for one Mortgage that was duplicated 3 to 10 times.

I am begining to think that there was a lot of Fraud and Counterfiting of Mortgages. Selling the same Mortgage to 10 different people.  That is why the FED Nationalized FRE, FNM, & AIG.  To cover up the Fraud.

I would be so easy to do with breaking it up into Traunches were no one knows how many Traunces the Mortgage went into.  So, you have a $100,000. Mortgage and 1 Million Dollars being put into Traunches representing that one $100,000. Mortgage.  They thought they would never get caught because no one would put the pieces together again.  Kind of like Humpty Dumpty.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:56 | 593262 Bob
Bob's picture

Nahhh, it couldn't be! 

Let's just fight our neighbors and completely ignore that infinitely remote possibility. 

After all, they're doing God's Work

God Bless America.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:53 | 593251 BennyBoy
BennyBoy's picture

It's grand theft.

 

But don't worry they'll buy another judge that'll over turn this ruling.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 17:59 | 593269 deepsouthdoug
deepsouthdoug's picture

Alan Grayson for President!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:07 | 593294 Quantum Nucleonics
Quantum Nucleonics's picture

What a sad state we've come to where people are cheered for dodging their debts.  You've turned a nuance of contract law into a bullshit conspiracy theory.

There ought not be anything wrong when.... if I loan you money, you default, that I hire a third party to help me collect... even if in the contract between me and the "servicer" it says they take title and I offer all manner of incentives to maximize my recover.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:22 | 593320 zaknick
zaknick's picture

There ought not be anything wrong when.... if I loan you money, you default, that I hire a third party to help me collect.

 

Honest money, yes; bankster fraud, NO.

 

Banksters need a-lynching.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 03:59 | 594211 Seer
Seer's picture

Let me guess, you're also a supporter of extrajudicial killings.

Clearly you have missed the POINT of all of this, which is due-process-of-law!

Another apologist for the abuser class...

Thanks for playing!

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:23 | 593322 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

Man I'm sick of this bullshit. I hate the bankers as much as anyone, but asshats that are delinquent on their mortgages don't deserve a free ride. GTFO of the house already.

Myself and d'loads of others paid off our mortgages, or are well current. Bought what we could afford and all that. Made sacrifices elsewhere to do so. We're not asking for a free lunch, we're just asking you don't make us regret being financially prudent.

My understanding is that this is just a paper trail issue, end of the day these people are deliquent.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:43 | 593366 goldmiddelfinger
goldmiddelfinger's picture

Watch your neighborhood get shredded w empties prude

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:54 | 593390 Cheyenne
Cheyenne's picture

"Myself and d'loads of others paid off our mortgages, or are well current. Bought what we could afford and all that. Made sacrifices elsewhere to do so. We're not asking for a free lunch, we're just asking you don't make us regret being financially prudent."

Way too late for that. TARP sealed the deal on that Fall '08. It's been downhill from there.

Do you mind revealing roughly where you live?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:26 | 593451 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

Way too late for that. TARP sealed the deal on that Fall '08. It's been downhill from there.

Do you mind revealing roughly where you live?

Upstate NY, capital district. One of the few places in the country where unemployment isn't that bad, apparently the government has money to burn and is growing.

Bought just over 2 years ago, already paid off the mortgage. Home value has taken a hit, but the market here never got quite as hot here as nevada/fl etc, so the hit isn't so bad. Exactly how much I overpaid I don't know, but one of my neighbours up the road has had his house on the market for almost 6 months. It's not going anywhere over winter, when (if) it sells I may get some 'price discovery'.

This whole story stinks of outright fraud, if the GSE's were getting losses covered, while servicers were collecting foreclosure sale $$, then heads ought to roll. Doesn't mean those that fell behind should get a free ride, as the taxpayers (the prudent ones included) are funding that free ride.

I'm just sick of lack of accountability anywhere. I'm not alone. There's plenty of people that didn't over extend, that didn't roll over negative equity into their new car purchase while being underwater on their home loan, plenty of people that had a sizeable deposit. They're all taking a hit on their home values, there's no bailout for them. Fine, I'll suck up the hit to my home value, I made a poorly timed purchase. I'll take responsibility, noone forced me to buy. Just like noone forced these other clowns to buy.

There's no need to abate all foreclosures. It's a populist move by another asshat politican hoping to wring out some support. This is simple, if laws are being broken, hold people accountable. If some bank/company breaks a law filing a foreclosure they don't have the legal right to file, then prosecute them accordingly. Start holding people accountable for the laws they're breaking (if they're breaking them) and watch how quickly they all get their paperwork in order.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:31 | 593844 UninterestedObserver
UninterestedObserver's picture

LOL oh so you're the comic relief for tonight, great. Yeah so far we have seen so many bankers/mortgage company employees/politicians doing perp walks I don't think anyone has any faith or belief that the system is fair.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 23:50 | 593975 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

I take it you thought I was joking...

Why do people just not give a shit that NOT A SINGLE HEAD HAS ROLLED over this whole financial crisis? (other than those on sites like this). 

The buck stops somewhere right.....? Right?? Apparently not anymore...

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:52 | 594074 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

I think he's in the Hampton's...

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:38 | 593606 Miss Expectations
Miss Expectations's picture

Let's say you need money and you know that your neighbor is behind on his car payment.  You know this because your wife works at the car dealer.  You get your wife to give you the car's title and you write your name on it.  Then you call a repo guy to pick up your neighbor's car and then you sell the car on craigslist. 

This is not a paper trail issue.  Stealing the title and selling the car and taking the money is fraud.

 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:44 | 593873 granolageek
granolageek's picture

Yes it's a paper trail issue. However JPM forged a paper trail that led to it, rather than to Fannie Mae, who is the real lien holder. It also unlawfully deprived the county registrar of deeds, or whatever he's called in Florida,  of at least two additional recording fees. (Fees which you cannot blame on any Democrat. They go back to Plantagenet England)

 

 It may well be that JPM would have forwarded the money to Fannie Mae. But a forged document with an incorrect beneficiary does not pass the smell test. and would cloud the title to the property in a way that would, at a minum, cost thousands of dollars to clear up. (Varies by state, I've no specific knowledge of Florida.) I simply fail to see how any honest judge could do anything but insist on a valid paper trail.

 

In this case, the preponderance of the evidence is that JPM and its counsel are making a practice of submitting forged documents that in aggregate would allow JPM to pocket hundreds of millions of dollars that rightfully belong to others. I do not claim that they would. I claim that no judge should accept the "could". And that any sherriff who smelled the "could" should go talk to the judge.

To me, the facts of this case basically require any honest judge in the 50 states insist that any foreclosure submitted by JPM or its cookie cutter counsel have a paper trail so clear that Sarah Palin could follow it.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:35 | 593351 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture

Shows why the gov't should not be involved in financial markets, home lending, etc.  Gonna make everyone a libertarian before they are done.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:12 | 593423 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

If it was not for the Fed Gov the majority of people making less than 100,000 would be renters and not home owners.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 06:01 | 594259 ffart
ffart's picture

100,000 whats. Unicorn farts? Pubic hairs? 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 23:38 | 593957 granolageek
granolageek's picture

Umm, no, gonna make everyone a Democrat. Or a Teddy Roosevelt Republican.

 

Libertarians seem to be saying it's just fine for JPM to forge documents to kick you out of your house and give the money to JPM instead of the real lienholder (Fannie Mae). I'm fine with the foreclosure for an unpaid mortgage. I'm fine with foreclosing on someone who doesn't pay their mortgage. I am spectacularly unfine with the idea of doing so based on forged documents with an incorrect beneficiary.

 

All you Libertarians with your gold and your guns. Which one of you will stand up and say that you believe that Jamie Dimon, presented with a check made out to him for money that was actually owed to you would endorse that check over to you?

Everyone that is claiming that the judge in Florida should not have ruled as he did is claiming that Jamie Dimond would have passed that check on. May I have some of what you're smoking?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:43 | 593360 tom
tom's picture

So the legal question is whether a bank servicing a mortgage that has been bundled into a GSE/agency MBS has the right to foreclose on that mortgage?

I'm sure the GSE/agency intended to give the servicing bank the right to foreclose. Whether they drew up the contracts properly, are following them to the letter, and are able to demonstrate that in court is another matter.

But let's get down to the brass tacks. When somebody defaults on a GSE/agency-guaranteed mortgage, the federal government is on the hook to the MBS owner. Do you really think that federal courts will not support the federal government's ability to recover some of the debt by having the servicing bank foreclose on and sell the home?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:51 | 593382 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

you ask a policy question, the law is the law, until someone passes a new law

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:59 | 593399 tom
tom's picture

No, I'm talking about how law can be differently interpreted, and how federal courts are unlikely to support interpretations that would be financially damaging to the federal government.

If you want a policy question, here's one: What is Grayson trying to achieve here? A nullification of all GSE/agency-guaranteed mortgages? Let the borrowers have their homes for free, and add the outstanding MBSs to the federal debt? Great plan.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 22:49 | 593881 granolageek
granolageek's picture

No, the legal question is whether a bank servicing a mortgage has the right to forge a document that would allow it to keep the proceeds of the foreclosure rather than forward it to the actual lienholder.

 

Would you care to defend the idea that it does?

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:56 | 594080 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

Tom, you are right...perhaps under the current law the Banksters have to pull back, but the law will be changed....there is too much at stake.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:49 | 593377 moneymutt
moneymutt's picture

this is about equal protection under the law...if I want to collect a debt from small business that owes me something, I have to go thru all the paces and processes to prove I'm owed the money...big banks shouldn't get a pass on this...and if I got caught falsifying documents used as evidence to prove debt was owed me, I would be in big trouble, so should big banks....the law is the law, if MBS, CDOs etc made this to complicated to follow the law, then we should democratically address this, determine how to clean up mess, if we don't want to give eveyone the house they are squatting in because these big banks said f-the-law, we will just cheat on the paper work and expect everyone to be okay on it, then we, the people will have to look at this a determine how to clean up the sewer the banks created...but banks don't get the change law just for them and don't get to commit fraud as an easy way out.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:53 | 593388 fiddler_on_the_roof
fiddler_on_the_roof's picture

The Estate tax is the reason for people and their children to go into perpetual debt.

I am no republican, but I can see it clearly. Even if you pay a house off, due to high price of houses dues to credit availability, children need to always be in debt. Remove that alteast for middle class and then you will see the society blossom.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 04:18 | 594220 Seer
Seer's picture

Took me a minute to figure out what you're getting at (I got tripped up on the "society blossom" part, which, regardless, is NOT possible- not enough physical resources).  But then again maybe I'm misinterpreting; but anyway...

Yes, the aim is to chain people to debt.  Since I am able to think in more than one dimension I see various things in this.  On one hand there HAS to be some social binding to the future; I'm not sure what really would work, though clearly the current mechanism is losing its luster.  On the other hand I see this all as a scheme to keep the same ruling class (statistically there's less class movement in the US than in socialist Europe!) perched at the top of the pile.

All of this was initiated based on a sense of scarcity.  Clearly, because we're on a finite planet scarcity does exist; but, scarcity does NOT equal desire, and what we're finally seeing is a misplaced desire (is Edward Bernays at work here?)- homes and whatnot that are mere baubles, things that are guaranteed to NOT have any real value (demand) in the future?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 18:56 | 593395 jbc77
jbc77's picture

When are we going to say enough of this shit? This is sickening. They closed on a note held by Fannie? What the fuck is going on? We have just a country that has fallen right into the shitter. No one is fucking doing anything. Is there is no fucking law for these bankers. This stuff just makes me sick. We're rotten to the core.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:07 | 593409 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Conflicting views on a question of morality, not finances.  The only reason we are discussing this is because of the fed with its "bookkeeping entries" of debt and the fractional reserve rules allowing banks to inflate the money supply as they see fit.

The fact that people grabbed what they could to buy things they couldn't afford is wrong and two wrongs don't make a right. So is this ignorance? Greed? Both?

As for Fannie, JPM etc., whoever fronted the cash (or bought the debt) should get the money back/the rights to the property. And yes, it shouldn't surprise you that when they can't get it back, they will dump it on the taxpayer.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:59 | 594088 granolageek
granolageek's picture

As near as I can tell, CTX wrote this mortgage and designated JPMorgan to service it. All fine. The debt was then sold at least three times, ending up in the hand of Fannie Mae. Still fine.

 

However, JPM, the servicer, neglected to register any of these transfers. Oops, bad. Not Clinton/CRA or even FDR kind of bad, but Magna Carta, 1215 AD, kind of bad. Anyone want to defend this?

 

After all this, the borrower fell into arrears. OK, it's totally legit to foreclose. But the chain of title is back at 199x, three transfers ago. So, after the fact, the servicer submits a forged document claiming that the original lender transfered the debt to directly to it, rather than going through the actual three transfers ending in a different entity for whom it is merely an agent.

If the court accepts this fraudulent document, the servicer (JPM) can claim the right to keep the proceeds of the foreclosure rather than forwarding them to the legitimate lienholder. Looking for someone to defend this. I'm not saying JPM would, I'm asking why a judge should accept a deal where they could.

If JPM keeps the money (still hypothetical folks), then at least the legitimate lienholder, and also random others depending on the state, can sue to overturn the whole mess for anything from 3 years to roughly forever, also depending on the state.

 

Dudes, it goes on. No matter how legitimate it is that the debtor hasn't made his payments, no jury and no honest judge could find clear and convincing evidence that the correct lienholder would recieve the proceeds, or that a buyer in good faith would recieve clear title.

In that situation, no honest court could allow the foreclosure to proceed until it believed those two conditions.

Further, in a situation like the present, where there is clear evidence of a pattern of fraud, it is not only within the court's discretion, but arguably its' duty under equity, if perhaps not just justice, to award free houses to deadbeats until such time as the banksters and their lying (that would be forgery) lawyers decide to play by the 500 year old rules.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:29 | 593427 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

This whole thing is a massive scam to drop the standard of living of 90% of the population and transfer the wealth to the elite. The scam used multiple paths.

The Banksters hijacked Fannie and Freddie through bribery of Congress and the Senate. The standards that forced Fannie and Freddie to be successful were tossed out the window. Fannie and Freddie became a dumping ground for the middle range of mortgages.

The Banksters and Wall Street then targeted the high and low ends of the market. By using securitization, huge amounts of debt were generated and then unloaded on investors. Bribery of the ratings agencies was key to this working. The sub-prime mortgage industry was brilliant in generating debt for Wall Street from people who would normally never get a mortage.

The other part of the scam was churn. As was done in the 80's the Banksters and the corrupt mortgage industry did everything possible to increase the number of times a property was flipped. This multiplied the problem by 2-3x. The stupid sheeple were a major part of this.

I would like everyone involved to go to jail or lose everything they have. The stupid sheeple fell into the trap hook line and sinker. They had dollar signs in their eyes. Unfortunately it seems very few are going to pay for being part of this scam.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:37 | 593478 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Jail?  How?  It was done "legally" right? This is why I'm saying, it is a matter of morality not legality.

If all here had more faith in the way money was created and circulated, I think we would not be having this conversation.  I think most would be pulling the "deadbeats" out of the houses they couldn't afford. Some would spit on them after having them removed for added insult.

And, Anarchist why was it that seeing $$$$$ made them "smart investors" then and now they are the "stupid sheeple" Can't have it both ways. And how about all the politicians?  Where were they when everything was "cool"  Now they jump out of the woodwork to support the poor little guy that is drowning in debt?

Look, the system works because it is within all of us to be greedy. The banks want money, the goofs (us) want to be successful investors and the politicians want votes. Many here understand the way it works and hence the "Gold Bitchez" every 3 seconds. Do "Gold Bitchez" people realize that the same people floating funny money own all the gold? Do the "Gold Bitchez" people realize they too are just trying to line their pocket? Nothing wrong with that but everyone is trying to get something here.  Naturally, the stupidest and least sophisticated will end up holding nothing.

Mr. Chairman, send me an email, lemme know how you intend for this to proceed so we can get it over with. Dollars, Euros, Gold, Crap, life's a bit too short.

 

 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 21:27 | 593700 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

You are so wrong. Ignoring every other fact, the bribing of Fitch, Moody's and S&P to put AAA ratings on turds was illegal. The whole sub-prime market hinged on these ratings. The jumbo mortgages that were securitized also were dependant on these ratings.

If our Justice department was not made up of bribe taking political hacks, tons of skumbags on Wall Street, the banks, ratings agencies and mortgage industry would be indicted and lose every penny they ever made. They have mountains of evidence as well as eye witness testimony to the fraud. The fact that very few have been indicted shows how much in the bag the Obama administration is.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 21:34 | 593724 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Ok, I see there is a breakdown in communication here.

 

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:57 | 594083 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

"What we have...is a failure to communicate"

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 01:26 | 594122 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

No need to "bribe" the rating agencies when you can reverse-engineer how they determine a rating and get a CDO to pass through their software to AAA!

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 04:32 | 594227 Seer
Seer's picture

"This whole thing is a massive scam to drop the standard of living of 90% of the population and transfer the wealth to the elite."

Ugh!  This is all too simplistic.  Whether it was some sort of plan/concerted effort does not mean that it wouldn't have turned out the same.  The entire system is predicated on growth, eventually the cards were going to come crashing down.  The astute will note that the game moved into the realm of pure fundamentals- Food, ->Shelter<- and Water.  Actually, "Shelter" should come first, as it's the lower-hanging fruit for growth to infiltrate; getting to the Food and Water categories lands in the realm of dictatorship-sponsored governments, we're not quite there .

Rather than pointing out that the road is full of potholes we should be asking why we're on this road, a road which is heading toward the cliff.  Obviously a system whose very underlying core/mechanism is faulty won't allow for such fundamental questioning.  The gig is up, we're just being distracted by all the rats jumping ship (though they really have nowhere to jump to).  Until people get this they will perpetually find themselves being victims (assuming that the system doesn't commit suicide via nukes or some such).

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:30 | 593459 JR
JR's picture

The two reasons that Nevada was selected as a nuclear waste dumpsite was 1) it’s a state with vast remote areas and 2) it has a very small congressional delegation with which to fight the other big states. 

In some ways, Freddie and Fannie are like Nevada’s Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. They have been selected to receive every piece of toxic material that the big financial institutions won’t touch because of their capacity to receive unlimited quantities of worthless paper and have it insured by fiat money backed by the American taxpayer. Freddie and Fannie, i.e., the American taxpayers, have become Congress’s wastebasket.

Why is this possible?  Easy. Because of fiat money.  With fiat money, you can write off debt, you can devalue as much money as needed under the table through Freddie and Fannie to bail the banks, anything.  You see, Congress is not worrying when they have a Bernanke printing press. The main thing they want is for the banks to be protected from toxic material.  So easy; dump it somewhere vast where it can be handled--on Freddie and Fannie.

Without fiat money we can’t have consistent war throughout the world, without fiat money we can’t have pork barrel healthcare in the midst of a recession, without fiat money we can’t have the most widespread financial spending in history, without fiat money we can’t have a dumping ground for toxic mortgages that don’t’ work... Fiat money is an insurance policy, for Congress and the TBTFs.

That is, until people won’t stand for it anymore.

 

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:31 | 593466 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

Freddie and Fannie were fine for many years. It was the politicians looking for money from the Banksters who destroyed them.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:20 | 593556 JR
JR's picture

Exactly, there's no comparison with what they were before.  And your article above was spot on. And you explained the mechanics of how it happened. You make the point that it was intentional, and that is the point we should never forget.  When it just keeps happening in cycles, it’s intentional!

And you’re right; there were people buying houses who knew they couldn’t pay for them.  If you’re smart enough to realize you can’t pay for something, and you’re smart enough to know the government, who is your neighbors, is going to have to pick up the tab, then you’re responsible

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 21:36 | 593731 Anarchist
Anarchist's picture

In response to fiat money..

The US can do what it wants for multiple reasons. The dollar is the worlds reserve currency. The US is the only country that can project massive amounts of military power. The US has 800 foreign military bases. Multiple countries around the world allow the US to do what it does because in the short term it benefits them. The Europeans, Indians and others are afraid of China's growth and want the US to expend it's wealth. There will be a tipping point where sides are chosen. It may be an economic crisis. I would not be so sure some of our staunchest allies don't jump ship.

 

 

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 01:33 | 594128 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

What id10t originates a loan for $725,000+ to someone making $14,000 picking strawberries?

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 04:37 | 594231 Seer
Seer's picture

Look at all the rich fuckers that made those loans and tell me that they were stupid.  No, people who believe that it's the poor that are responsible for their ills are the ones that are stupid.

BTW - At least those picking strawberries actually DO something, unlike the majority of paper-pushers.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:48 | 593499 jbc77
jbc77's picture

This is about a system......a financial system that has rotted to the very core. What next?  Will anything ever surprise us? Take a step back, think about his - we have banks stealing peoples homes that they don't own a note on. I'm sickened. This might not even make the "news".

If this isn't the last fucking straw, I don't know what is. We have sunk so low as a nation. We're just a bunch of motherfuckers now. Everyone just just fucks everyone and the authorities, if not assiting in the theft, just look the other way.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:54 | 593506 edotabin
edotabin's picture

Not eloquent, but mostly accurate. So what's new?

Ok, so we all bitch. So what's new?

And the corrective measures are?  Now the answer to this would be news, to me at least.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 19:56 | 593513 VWbug
VWbug's picture

i find it very funny that the anarchists are all suddenly anal about following not just the spirit of the law, but also the finest technical details

rotflmao

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:40 | 594249 Seer
Seer's picture

I find it humorous that one can stand naked and laughing, pointing how silly others are.

Time for you to educate yourself on what anarchism is.

Yes, while anarchists don't recognize the "law" as being superior (most of the world has held this same view), this is not the same as saying that anarchists do not honor social contracts (nor do they run around throwing bricks, as the MSM propagandists program everyone to believe).

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:28 | 593576 CU1981
CU1981's picture

Grayson will most likely suffer an "unfortunate accident"

 

Soon...

 

(sorry if this is redundant, didn't read all the posts)

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:33 | 593578 randfan
randfan's picture

like others here, I guess I'm confused with the anger towards the moronic borrowers who over-extended themselves.  The issue here is whether or not those foreclosing have legal title in the properties they're foreclosing on.

I have no love loss for stupid people, but I don't have a legal right to confiscate the Lexus my idiot neighbor can't afford.

When interest rates dropped in March '09, I refi'd the property I bought in late '07.  Even though a title search was done not more than 20 months earlier (when I purchased the property) I had to pay for another one when I refi'd.  Under what right do banks, lawyers, etc., have to foreclose on property they have no title in?

Grayson, undoubtedly, is grandstanding for political gain but it doesn't make the issue any less important. 

If you permit bankers to confiscate property they don't own, then it is only a matter of time before they use similarly twisted logic/legal reasoning to confiscate other kinds of property they don't own.  

Irrespective of the side of the aisle to which you pray, this is dangerous and scary stuff.

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 23:01 | 593895 JR
JR's picture

Yes.  And your point is well taken.  But don’t forget this is a political as well as economic issue.  There is deliberate obfuscation and misguidance being used to create mystery, deception and public confusion. Most of all, the criminal classes hope to blame the people for what they do.

For instance, the Committee for Responsible Lending (CRL) is trying to frame the debate around racial issues.  Listen to this CRL statement made in June that deliberately promotes, IMO, balkanization within the United States: 

“In terms of actually foreclosures black and Hispanic borrowers are nearly twice as like to have already lost their homes.  The data shows that for every 10,000 loans made to African Americans, 790 foreclosures were completed, compared to 769 for every 10,000 loans made to Latinos and 452 for every 10,000 loans made to whites.  As a result of these home losses, $193 billion in wealth will be drained from the African American community between 2009 and 2012, while the Latino community will lose $180 billion during that same period.  Civil rights groups are outraged.”

On the other hand, when it suits their purposes, America is a “melting pot.”

Minorities compose over one-third of the American population, 102.5 million in 2007, with Hispanic and Latino Americans and African Americans as the largest minority groups.  Part of this mortgage crises is centered on that fact.

President Bush set a goal of helping 5.5 million minority families buy their own homes before the end of the decade, hoping to end what he called a "home ownership gap." He traveled the “minority communites" citing high down payments as a major obstacle to home ownership for low-income families and pushing for millions to expand the American Dream Down Payment Fund.

Billboards offering $6000 cash incentives to home buyers dotted minority neighborhoods, offering 3% or less mortgage rates and no down payments, as enticement background for the Bush minority spiel:"Part of economic security is owning your own home, We have to set a big goal for America and we must focus our resources and attention on the goal.”

All the while, Obama was bringing Chicago-mob politics to Washington, and with him the mob’s use of ACORN and  the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) for a grassroots activist movement to force banks into bad loans —planting the seeds of today’s  fianancial mortgage meltdown. Barack Obama for years worked with ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now),  abusing the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in ‘subprime’ loans to often uncreditworthy customers using intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion.  And now he’s going to force taxpayers to pay off the bad loans.

Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac home financial crisis.  Barack Obama was the attorney repesenting ACORN in this effort.

Combine all this with  Goldman Sachs’ “ unprecedented reach and power… to turn all of America into a giant pump-and-dump scam,” including its role as a chief bundler among bundlers of toxic fraudulent credit waste now totaling in the trillions, and you can see that this is a developing story.

The fat lady has yet to sing.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:46 | 594251 Seer
Seer's picture

Translation: fraud was institutionalized

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 20:45 | 593619 granolageek
granolageek's picture

So only borrowers, not the banks have to follow the rules?

 

In the current case the docs they forged would have allowed JPM to pocket the procedes instead of passing them on to Fannie Mae. Is this ok by you?

Mon, 09/20/2010 - 23:34 | 593950 jram
jram's picture

Look no further than the recently passed S1196, the new condo and HOA law in Florida which went into effect in July, 2010. 

Some of the provisions here are outright unconstitutional, allows for illegal ceasure and denial of use rights to common elements, ie club house, pool etc. for as little as drummed up charges and fines, then foreclosure.  If they don't like you, they can fine you and start the foreclosure process when fines, late fees and interest is over $1000. 

Florida is a lawyer's dream. Citizens have no constitutional rights to private property, including people without mortgages!  Incompetence rules the day. This state is sure to be left behind when and if we see any economic recovery.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 01:04 | 594010 stev3e
stev3e's picture

The big class warfare battle - but it simply is not true.  By and large, good honest folks who have been paying their mortgages and living reasonably are not and have not been losing their homes.  Somewhere around 1/3 of all the subprimes were second homes - flippers.  Add to that the fact that many mortagages were 100% or near 100% LTV.  A lot of these scam borrowers and reckless borrowers lost nothing or next nothing as their mortgage payments on these no-down houses was on par with rent.  Hell, I was offered a 105% mortgage during the bubble - that's right I could have taken money off the table at closing.

Screw all the thiefs - lenders and lendees.

The rip off, ladies and gentlemen, was from you and I through TARP, courtesy of our government.  The foreclosees aren't paying for this shit, you and I are - the greatest transfer of wealth form the middle class to the bankers was ripped off from all the responsible people who lived within their means.

This warfare is not about rich vs poor. or Dem vs Rep,  it is about moral people vs immoral people, be they rich or poor, Dem or Rep.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:51 | 594255 Seer
Seer's picture

"This warfare is not about rich vs poor. or Dem vs Rep,  it is about moral people vs immoral people, be they rich or poor, Dem or Rep."

Yup.  But... the schemes that create the scams come from the rich.  Many of the poor [have been lead to] believe that if they go along with the rich that they too can be rich (when in fact they just end up being door mats).  Greed = not good.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 09:01 | 594401 stev3e
stev3e's picture

Wrong - the schemes do not come from the rich, they come from immoral people.  Some poor people are made rich by schemes, some rich are made poor by schemes - but certainly all the people in the middle pay for schemes.

You accuse the 'Rich' and sympathize with the 'Poor' going along with the rich to become rich.  How come you don't also accuse the 'Poor' of scamming along with the 'Scammers'?

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 00:54 | 594076 Occams Parsimony
Occams Parsimony's picture

That is the second time in a row that I have to agree with Waterfallsparks. I also believe that Fanny and Freddie are the dumping grounds for non existent or duplicated mortgages.

Fraud is Fraud and forgive me for not being surprised.

We started this with Maiden Lane I, II, III with the purpose of unraveling CDO contracts to get to the base mortgage information. Goldman does a fast shred and recompile on the contracts then transferring the Chaff to AIG’s balance sheet and spills over the rest to Fanny and Freddie for further parsing and removal from the system.

Let’s just call Fanny and Freddie banker tools for cleaning their inventory.

I will bet that what Fanny and Freddy are pushing back to the banks now are probably spic and span versions of their own garbage from 3 years ago.

The question that I ask myself everyday is what is the endgame of twenty plus trillion dollars in actual debt. What is the exit strategy? Fiat Currency does not solve the issue as the problem is too large for just that.

 

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 01:12 | 594107 Careless Whisper
Careless Whisper's picture

The question that I ask myself everyday is what is the endgame

the endgame is a global currency. it's called the bancor. the imf proposed it along with a global central bank (cartel).

 

http://www.infowars.com/bancor-the-name-of-the-global-currency-that-a-sh...

 

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 05:53 | 594257 Seer
Seer's picture

Well, there really is no "end," rather, it's all just a means to continue to rule.  But, as I've been saying for some time now, any NWO is impossible given inadequate means for growth: rulers can only rule when they can promise prosperity, and partially deliver (usually through the oppression of others).

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 12:54 | 594334 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

bingo.  The world has expanded too quickly and there is limited growth potential available at this juncture...  the single world government/currency meme got completely bitch slapped by the chinese at copenhagen...  the us cannot pass the torch to some puppet of the us masquerading as a world body/bank.  Instead, we all crawl back into our shells and ride out the storm...  hopefully we have enough turtles left to rebuild in the aftermath...  and those turtles want to play nice.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 08:45 | 594375 ZeroPoint
ZeroPoint's picture

A global currency may not be a bad idea. At least we would have to learn to live within our means, which means the political class would be eviscerated in short order. It would be painful watching the dollar crash to nothingness, but it's probably the only reset button we have to stop all the bullshit that goes on.

Tue, 09/21/2010 - 12:57 | 594886 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

The reset button is the complete and total destruction of the world's reserve currency...  which leads to jockeying and adaptation of the remainder...  a true world currency would solidify the irrelevance of national borders and autonomy.  In a system with a true world currency, there is no reset button.

Mon, 10/04/2010 - 04:32 | 623477 Herry12
Herry12's picture

Thanks for such a great post and the review, I am totally impressed! Keep stuff like this coming!...
cheap site hosting
windows web hosting
windows vps hosting
windows vps

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!